Oregon asks Ninth Circuit to drop contempt over state psychiatric hospital admitting delays

The state said it has incurred over $4 million in contempt fines.PORTLAND, Ore. (CN) — Oregon challenged a contempt finding on Thursday over hospital admission times for criminal defendants needing mental health treatment.“The District Court found defendants in contempt and imposed daily fines that to date have exceeded $4 million based on information that was not admitted into evidence, in which the hospital did not have an opportunity to rebut,” Lee Salmon argued.The appeal is the latest chapter in long-running litigation concerning admission times at the Oregon State Hospital.Metropolitan Public Defenders and Disability Rights Oregon, then called the Oregon Advocacy Center, sued state health officials over claims of civil rights violations of mentally ill people. A 2002 federal court determined jailing a mentally incompetent person for over seven days is unconstitutional and entered a permanent injunction requiring the state to admit to the Oregon State Hospital any detainee who is found unable to stand trial within seven days.U.S. District Judge Adrienne Nelson held the hospital in contempt last June after the Oregon State Hospital failed to admit criminal defendants in need of mental health treatment to the hospital within seven days. At the time of the contempt hearing, the average time a criminal detainee waited in jail before being admitted to the hospital was 29 days.Nelson imposed a $500 fee per class member per day while they remain out of compliance.Before the appeals panel, the state argued it didn’t have the chance to challenge the evidence the advocacy groups submitted.“I am persuaded by your argument that the court shouldn’t have relied on new information that you didn’t have a chance to respond to, but I’m really struggling to figure out if there was any new information,” U.S. Circuit Judge Michelle Friedland, a Barack Obama appointee, remarked.Specifically, the state argued the lower court improperly based its contempt finding on a May 2025 report prepared by the court-appointed neutral expert, Dr. Debra Pinals, rather than information in the record at the time of the March 2025 contempt hearing.“The general tenor of the 11th report is overall fairly negative toward the hospital’s efforts,” Salmon said.The state argued the lower court improperly relied on personnel changes, management of capacity issues and delays in Medicaid policy reform that occurred after the contempt hearing. Salmon said the state would have called witnesses, cross-examined the court-appointed neutral expert and presented additional evidence if it had been given the opportunity.The Oregon State Hospital is currently in compliance and has been for three months. The contempt will be purged when the state achieves “substantial compliance,” a benchmark that has not been defined.“That’s a concrete example of the difficulties of complying with this order,” Salmon said.The state also argued the contempt hearing was more favorable to the hospital’s efforts than the report.“That shift in tone is significant,” Salmon said.But the advocates disagree.“I think it’s fairly absurd to think that a district court who is examining evidence is going to be swayed by a slight difference in tone, to the extent that even exists,” Thomas Stenson, attorney with Disability Rights Oregon, argued.Further, the groups contended the state made no effort to take affirmative steps to challenge the information they disagreed with in the report until it was used in the court’s ruling.“Okay, so you’re blaming the other side for sitting on their hands and not doing anything until the appeal?” asked U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik, a Bill Clinton appointee from the Western District of Washington sitting on the panel by designation.“This was not something that came out of left field,” Stenson responded.Three years ago, the parties agreed to a stipulation saying the court would use Pinals’ reports to assess the state’s compliance.“Well, we’re assessing the defendant’s compliance. They’ve been in violation of this permanent injunction for seven years,” Stenson said.The contempt fines are being held in an account controlled by the lower court and cannot be spent while the appeal is ongoing. The funds are intended to bring about compliance or improve conditions for people who have been harmed.“The ongoing appeal and the trying to manage a case, which is both on appeal and there’s continuing developments here at the state level, is causing confusion and delay,” Stenson said.The Ninth Circuit panel, which also included U.S. Circuit Judge Ana de Alba, a Joe Biden appointee, did not indicate when it would rule.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads